CO885-(11-13) — Page 332

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TELCO. 885

12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

+6

2

force, to have the first claim to any particular position on the water, but not so as to exclude the British from such rights of free concurrent fishing as they have "hitherto enjoyed and are entitled to claim."

That Lord Tenterden had thought it right to enter into the above brief explanation, in order to account for the more or less ambiguous terms which that Article contained, but which your Lordship understood were intended, whilst still maintaining the right of British fishermen to concurrent fishing, to yield the preference of station in point of fact to French fishermen, a concession which the Colonial Office are of opinion would be found acceptable with the French Commissioner, whilst the details of such an arrangement could be determined by the Joint Commission which it was proposed to appoint to regulate all such matters on the spot.

·

That, in drawing our attention to that particular article, your Lordship, at the same time, directed Lord Tenterden to observe that, in your Lordship's opinion, it was most essential in any new negotiation to avoid the use of ambiguous or vague or con- tradictory expressions, such as might give rise to probable, or even possible, embarass- rent or dispute in the time to come; and that your Lordship would request that, in any amendments which we might think fit to suggest in the proposed articles then submitted to us, we would keep that principle prominently in view.

That your Lordship did not desire to offer any further observation upon the draft articles in their present stage, but that your Lordship would be glad to be favoured with our report on that subject at our earliest possible convenience, as it was most important that every facility should be afforded for a speedy settlement of those out- standing questions, and the British Commissioner has already proceeded to Paris with a view to an immediate resumption of negotiations.

That the draft of the answer which your Lordship had caused to be returned to the Colonial Office was also annexed.

We are also honoured with a further letter from Sir Julian Pauncefote, bearing date the 28th ultimo, enclosing copy of a despatch from Her Majesty's ambassador at Paris, relative to the above question, and to request that we would take that despatch into our consideration with reference to the papers then before us.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

Report

That the Article A. of the proposed Convention is, in our opinion, so framed that, instead of lessessing, it will add to the difficulties which have, down to the present time, beset the Newfoundland Fisheries question.

That the expression "first claim to any particular position on the water" is vague and ambiguous in itself, and is not made more certain by the following words: "but "not so as to exclude the British from such rights of free concurrent fishing as they "have hitherto enjoyed and are entitled to claim."

The rights of the British are the very things in dispute, and on the first occasion, if the Convention be agreed to, will arise under it the question what rights have the British hitherto enjoyed, what rights are they entitled to claim?

Again, what are the rights, and what is the meaning of a "free concurrent fishery," which is not to interrupt in any manner by competition," the French fishermen (British Declaration, 3rd September 1783)?

Further, what is the meaning of "the first claim to any particular position on the

water?

Take the case of a British vessel taking up a position at a distance from and even out of sight of French vessels. Is the British ship to keep that place or give it up at the demand of the French vessel which may come up some time afterwards?

To take another case. How far do the rights of the French extend from the particular position on the water originally taken up?

We could trouble your Lordship with other instances of complication, which, as it seems to us, would arise under Article A. But we merely suggest, for your Lordship's consideration, those matters which immediately occur as vague and ambiguous to the extent of making the important Article A. utterly useless, if not mischievous.

We have not the local or practical knowledge which would enable us to

Bay this Article could be amended. And we are pressed by the observation of Mr. Carter, how that if a distance were given within which no British vessel should fish the French might occupy the whole fishing-ground to the exclusion of the British.

We can, therefore, only submit to your Lordship the objections which occur to us, and the reasons for those objections.

We think Article F. should follow after Article D., and be placed before the present Article E.

And in Article G., instead of "belonging," the words "which belong" might be used as a more positive assertion of the fact.

We further suggest the omission of the words "by their competition" at the end of the first paragraph of Article G.

The Earl of Derby,

&c. &c.

We have, &c.,

(Signed)

JOHN HOLKER.

HARDINGE S. GIFFARD. J. PARKER DEANE.

{